THEORIA OMNIA - A work in progress 3

THEORIA OMNIA

The Fundamental Mathematics and Physics of the Universe

Michael J. Bull

2013

Word Count 13014

Contents

Introduction

The Fundamental Quantities - Table 1

Notes on Table 1

Development of the Universe

Mass and Gravity

Time

The Constants

The Derivation of Frequency Constants

The Fundamental Particles – Table 2

Anti-Matter

The Speed of Light

Life

Experimental Action and Supporting Evidence - Table 3

Notes on Table 3

Appendix 1 – Supporting Evidence

Derivation of Space-Time Units from SI Units

Appendix 2 – Supporting Evidence

List of Space-Time Units

Congruence of Newtonian Physics and Space-Time Units

Proof of the nature of Mass by its measure in Space-Time Units

Summation of the Effects of the Theoria Omnia Model and of Human Nature

Introduction

The search for the 'Theory of Everything' continues. The over-arching concept of the universe which ties together the rather fractured array of theories, complex mathematics, constants, related and unrelated ideas, may come from relatively simple mathematical principles which often can point the way, before physical science arrives at the theories necessary to explain that which is observed, and frame laws to cover every case, without exception. The concept of the inter-action of space and time as a basis of what we observe is not new. The concept of how both of these fundamentals have progressed from the birth of the universe to show that which can now be observed, and how the mathematics can clearly represent that process of expansion, is new, and is the subject of this paper. An understanding of the principles governing all of the universe may assist in forming new, or modifying existing theories to explain every case.

This paper is presented in a form as brief as the author is able to present, consistent with conveying an understanding of its contents at a level which most with a basic grounding in physics can understand. The mathematics are simple and concise but also the foundation of significant evidence to support the reality of the physics of the cosmos.

The road to the advance of scientific knowledge is to know what it is that is not known. If that is known then science can advance in the direction that that knowledge leads rather than in a random and directionless lucky dip of discovery, debate and disagreement which takes much longer to intertpret and advance. That is why the 'Theory of Everthing' is important to pursue.

Table 1

The space-time interactions are represented from the X and Y axes of Table 1 below, and the process of the expansion of the universe by the increasing power indices of the s (space) and t (time) fundaments along the axes. The second mathematical operator on both axes is the inverse (reciprocal) of both s and t at their various power indices. The order in which these are presented is strongly supported by knowledge of some of the physical quantities or energies represented and expressed in space-time units of measure, which measures consistently agree with the more commonly used SI units. The consequences of the above order include areas which are either a product or a ratio of space and time. Explanations of the different effects that these mathematical operators have upon the reality of the universe are offered following the Table 1.

Table 1

M.J.Bull 2013

MATTER space expansion ----> VISIBLE UNIVERSE

0	s0	s1	s2	s3	s4	1/s	1/s2	1/s3	1/s4
t 0	s 0 t 0 singularity BIG BANG	s length, electric quantity (C)	s 2 area, magnetic quantity (W/m2)	s 3 volume, mass quantity (kg)	s 4 ?	1/s power (elec.mag. mass)	1/s2 ?	1/s3 ?	1/s4 ?
t1	t time	t s up quark	t s2 charm quark	t s3 top quark	t s4 gluon	t/s energy, work, electric charge	t/s2 force, electric potential, emf (Velec )	t/s3 elect field intensity (E)	t/s4 pressure
t2	t 2 ?	t 2 s down quark	t 2s2 strange quark	t 2s3 bottom quark	t 2s4 photon	t 2/s inertia	t 2/s 2 momentum, magnetic charge, electrical resistivity (ρ)	t 2/s 3 electric resistance (R), magnetic potential, mmf (Vmag )	t 2/s 4 magnetic field intensity (H)
t3	t 3 ?	t 3s electron	t 3s2 muon	t 3s3 tau	t 3s4 Z-boson	t 3/s moment of inertia	t 3/s2 ?	t 3/s3 mass charge	t 3/s4 magnetic resistance (μ), mass potential, massmf (Vmass)
t4	t 4 ?	t 4s electron nutrino	t 4s2 muon nutrino	t 4s3 tau nutrino	t 4s4 W-boson	t 4/s ?	t 4/s2 ?	t 4/s3 ?	t 4/s4 life charge (?)
1/t	1/t frequency 1 freedom υ	s/t speed, elec.current Ielec, Efield	s 2/t Hawking radiation (RH) (?)	s 3/t ?	s 4/t ?	1/ ts	1/ ts2	1/ ts3	1/ ts4
1/t2	1/t2 frequency 2 freedom (?)	s/t2 Δ speed, acceleration KE = Eυ 9.487 x 1033	s 2/t2 magnetic current Imag, Bfield electrical concuctivity (σ)	s 3/t2 ?	s 4/t2 ?	1/ t2s	1/ t2s2	1/ t2s3	1/ t2s4
1/t3	1/t3 frequency 3 freedom (?)	s/t3 Δ accel.,	s 2/t3 KB = Bυ 2.846 x1042	s 3/t3 gravity mass current Imass, gfield	s 4/t3 ?	1/ t3s positron	1/ t3s2	1/ t3s3	1/ t3s4
1/t4	1/t4 ?	s/t4 ?	s 2/t4 ?	s 3/t4 Kg = gυ 8.538 x 1050	s 4/t4 consciousness life current (Ilife) (?)	1/ t4s	1/ t4s2	1/ t4s3	1/ t4s4

↓Time expansion VISIBLE UNIVERSE ANTI – MATTER

There is much information in this Table which can be scientifically or mathematically proven beyond reasonable doubt, such as the correlation between SI units and S-T units (space-time units) for the various known quantities.

There is also much information in Table 1, such as that regarding the fundamental particles, which cannot at this point be proven. These inclusions are based upon an intuitive logic presented by the direction of the mathematics as a whole, rather than by the parts, but is not a rigorous proof. Mathematics direct attention in a particular direction, but it remains for science to test the validity of the mathematics with the observed physics. This has often been the case in an historical sense.

Notes on Table 1

Development of the Universe

Everything that physically exists is a function two fundamentals, space and time. There is strong evidence for this from the analysis of physical quantities of which we are aware, which can all be converted to units of measurement which can be expressed as space and time. Refer to the later discussion in this paper under Appendices 1 and 2. Max Planck was the first to prove this to be so, and his work has never been found to be incorrect. For example, speed = distance (space in 1 freedom) divided by time. All other quantities, including electrical, magnetic, mass and gravity can be similarly defined, as a function of space and time. These have been noted in Table 1 according to their space-time equivalent units of measure. Clearly, there is more to be discovered as our knowledge and interpretive ability advances, as indicated by the queries (?) in the Table. The known quantities expressed in S-T units provide the framework for the deduction of the units expressed on the X and Y axes of Table 1. The units of X and Y thus deduced are consistent with an expanding universe, already accepted by mainstream science from other evidence.

(1) Following the expansion of space and time from the singularity, known as the 'big bang', the universe appears to have developed in two separate ways (from a mathematical perspective), of space and time interaction.

(a) Firstly, the fundamental particles, which in various combinations constitute all of the atomic particles, are the mathematical product of space and time, that is, tⁿ s^m. Also to note is that the fundamental particles are contained within the boundaries of the visible universe (in Table 1 coloured in pale yellow). The anti-matter particles have two boundaries adjoining the visible universe and two boundaries which do not.

The Gauge Bosons have in common s⁴. (red)

The Leptons have in common t³ and t⁴. (green)

The Quarks have in common t and t². (blue)

The differences in the particle s and t powers accord with their differences in the Standard Model theory of particle physics. It is not clear where the recently found Higgs boson fits into this model, or if in fact its interpretation is correctly based within the group of fundamental particles, although recent reports from the CERN LHC work suggest so. Mass and Gravity belong in the t/s and s/t ratio regions respectively. This may be the clue as to why gravity cannot be made to fit into the st product region of the Standard Model of particle physics, the major significant anomaly which the Standard Model of particle physics fails to address. Table 1 makes the reason clear, it is because gravity does not originate from particle physics, st, but from the physics of fields, s/t, in the energy field area of the visible universe. There is further consideration of the fundamental particles below.

(b) Secondly, the observable phenomena of the visible universe are constituted from a mathematical ratio of space and time, that is, tⁿ / s^m or its reciprocal. The section of the visible universe defined by t/s contains mass, while the section defined by s/t contains gravity. These two phenomena are reciprocal and when multiplied equal 1. In SI units, mg = 1. The mathematics indicate this to be the case for all of the equivalent elements for t/s and s/t. It is noted that at present less is understood about the s/t or gravity sector than the t/s or mass sector. Most of mainstream science has yet to understand the nature of mass and gravity and their relationship to each other. The fundamental space-time measurement units of known quantities clarify their true nature and relationship to each other. Max Planck first pointed out that our units of measure are mostly contrived and he proposed measurement based on the physics of free space, which still stand as valid. The units of space-time used above are easily and consistently verifiable from simple SI units, including that of mass and gravity, and give greater clarity to the understanding of various phenomena, while correcting misconceptions still part of modern physics. A good example of this clarification is that which S-T units provide in the case of electro-magnetism. They show that magnetism is a 2 freedom analogue of electricity. They are both observed when electric charge moves through matter possessing mass (a conductor) so as to oppose one of the three degrees of freedom of scalar motion which mass posseses. Electric charge is a unit of space (s), and space moving through mass is mathematically the same as mass moving through space (which is what motion in an electric generator is). The magnetic effects are seen in the other degree of freedom at right angles to the electric current freedom. The motion ┴ electric current ┴ magnetic current. In S-T units t³/s³ (mass) = t²/s² (magnetism) x t/s (electricity). There is no explanation of this common phenomenum in mainstream physics. It is the use of space-time units which clarify the process of electricity generation and the origin and nature of magnetism.

(2) The difference in the mathematics between the fundamental particles and the visible universe may point to an explanation for the baffling difference in the behaviour of Quantum physics and Newtonian or Einsteinian physics. The fundamental difference may be that of st and s/t. One is the physics of matter while the other is the physics of energy. The photon and electron are familiar st particles interacting with the s/t universe as carriers of energy (not as energy) between separated space-times, and the function of some of the other particles has yet to be found beyond their effect on each other as noted by the Standard Model.

It is interesting to note that some of our known quantities, such as pressure or magnetic permeability (magnetic resistance) for example, have four space freedoms. We cannot envisage that, but like those of time which we cannot imagine, they are real.

Mass and Gravity

(3) Mass (t³/s³) is a three freedom scalar motion, a three freedom analogue of energy (t/s), and is carried by most matter, in a similar way that electric charge is carried by some matter. Gravity(s³/t³) is a three freedom field caused by mass current, a similar analogue of the electric field. (Magnetism is the exact equivalent in a two freedom analogue.) There is a reciprocity between Mass and Gravity that is mathematically represented by mg = 1. That reciprocity is evidenced by the S-T units of both, which when multiplied equal 1, (t³/s³ . s³/t³ = 1). The corollary to this simple equation is that if mass approaches infinity then gravity approaches zero and vice versa. In a region of large mass, such as the centre of the galaxy or a black hole, the acceleration (field) applied to the matter is increased and at the same time the gravity (field) is reduced. If one looks at the space-time units, gravity is s³/t³, and acceleration is s/t². If the s/t² (acceleration) is elevated then the residual is s²/t, (which combined make s³/t³ gravity) is also elevated. The unit s²/t does not have its own identity, but is the reciprocal of force (t/s²). The unit s²/t is possibly that which is known as Hawking radiation, which emanates from within a 'black hole' into space, and is observable. If both acceleration and Hawking radiation are elevated, then gravity is reduced by those amounts in that region of high mass. The equation mg = 1 holds as valid. The reason it seems to be counter intuitive is that of the misconception that gravity and acceleration are the same thing. In SI units, acceleration is measured in N/kg or m/s², gravity is measured in kg^-1. The acceleration unit N/kg can be written N.kg^-1 which is Force x Gravity. In Newtonian physics, F = ma and also F = a/g from the reciprocal relationship between mass and gravity. It follows then that g = a/F, (or acceleration x Hawking radiation) which expressed in space-time units is s³/t³ = s/t² divided by t/s² = s³/t³ , confirming the validity of the equation mg = 1, and that gravity and acceleration are not the same quantity. Similarly, matter (ts) and mass (t³/s³) are not the same quantity. Matter generally exhibits mass (charge), but in the same way that it exhibits electric charge or magnetic charge.

Mass charge is a three freedom analogue of electric charge. The distinctions are probably important to comprehension in other areas such as that of the Higgs boson, but are fundamental in understanding mass and gravity. Mass, like charge, is a scalar motion.

(4) The inverse scenario is a region with a very small quantity of mass,(which would normally also mean a relative absence of matter). In this region of space-time the equation mg = 1 indicates that gravity is high. As t³/s³ (mass) is small, then s³/t³ (gravity) is large because their product equals 1. This is likely the reason that regions of so called 'dark matter' have a high input to gravitational effects in the cosmos. The dark matter will likely be found not to exist at all because it is not matter which generates gravity. It is, in fact, the relative absence of mass which elevates gravity. Dark matter and dark energy are likely to be identified as man made inventions to explain a deficit in comprehension of the true nature of mass and gravity. Mass (the charge) generates acceleration of matter (except nutrinos) from the energy of the mass (gravity) field, always in the direction of the centre of the masses (mass equivalent of a magnetic pole), which accelerations are then equal and opposite when the magnitude of the masses are taken into consideration. Mass is a 3 freedom energy which attaches to matter, much as electric charge attaches to an electron. Newton's equation for the force of gravity, F = Gmm'/r² is not a fundamental space-time equation.

As D.B.Larsen explained -

“ The only dimensional discrepancy in the basic equations of the mechanical system is in the

gravitational force equation, which is expressed as F = Gmm'/r² , where G is the gravitational constant and r is the distance between the interacting masses. Although this equation is correct mathematically, it cannot qualify as a theoretically established relation. As one physics textbook puts it, this equation “is not a defining equation... and cannot be derived from defining equations. It represents an observed relationship.” The reason for this inability to arrive at a theoretical explanation of the equation becomes apparent when we examine it from a dimensional standpoint. The dimensions of force in general are those of the product of mass and acceleration. It follows that these must also be the dimensions of any specific force. For instance, the gravitational force acting on an object in the earth’s gravitational field is the product of the mass and the “acceleration due to gravity.” These same dimensions must likewise apply to the gravitational force in general. When we look at the gravitational equation in this light, it becomes evident that the gravitational constant represents the magnitude of the acceleration at unit values of m' and r, and that these quantities are dimensionless ratios. The dimensionally correct expression of the gravitational equation is then

F = ma, where the numerical value of a is Gm'/r² .”

Time

(5) Time is a more difficult quantity to envisage than is space. It is not difficult to understand the concept of length, width and depth with space because they are visible to us. To use an analogy, it is difficult for a camera to discern depth when it needs to see it in two space dimensions when there are three. The only way the camera can accomplish this is to reduce the length and width of the

object to keep its two dimensional perspective relative to its surroundings. A movie camera introduces the element of time into the picture, by capturing the change in the two spatial freedoms over a series of frames, which when run at speed, give a fair approximation of our view of reality. In the case of time, which we cannot envisage at all, it is difficult to accept that it also has dimensions equivalent to space, at least in a mathematical sense. The evidence for this lies in the space-time units which measure quantities which we can see, feel and understand. For example, acceleration has one space dimension and two time dimensions, s/t², but we have no difficulty comprehending acceleration. The t² part on its own leaves a comprehension deficit. The reciprocal of Time, 1/t, is a more easily comprehended concept, as frequency.

A study of Table 1 indicates that time is an energetic fundamental. In the Mass t/s section of the Table, it can be seen that the t is the numerator in the ratio. The energy content rises as the power of t rises. Mass charge, t³/s³, is more energetic than magnetic charge, t²/s², which in turn is more energetic than electric charge, t/s. The variation in energy between each is denoted by the constant, c, which is a large number (3 x 10⁸). The energy level between each of these is mc and between mass charge (energy) and electric charge (energy) it is mc² as Einstein famously pointed out. On the other hand in the Gravity s/t section, t is the denominator, so that equivalent progression between electric current (field) through magnetic current (field) to mass current (gravitation field) shows a large reduction in field strength per unit volume. This variation in field energies could be denoted by the constant 1/c or 1/c² as the case may be. These observations give some concept of the energy that time has, without a need to visualize time itself, and some insight into the other side (s/t) of Einstein's (t/s) energy equation E = mc².

Of interest is the observation that the weaker the field per unit volume, the larger is its range over which it has an effect. At one end of the scale is the strong nuclear force which range is measured in intra nuclear distances, and at the other end of the scale, gravity with a range extending into distances measured in light years. This may be a pointer to an unknown energy conservation principle related to volume.

The Constants

(6) The fundamental constants which Planck proposed are based upon the physics of free space rather than any contrived unit of measure are:

Name Symbol Value SI unit Space-Time unit

Planck constant h 1.054 x 10^-34 J.s t²/s (inertia)

Coulomb constant k_e 1.054 x 10⁹ kg m³ s^-2 C^-2 t/s² (voltage, force)

Boltzmann's constant k_B 1.380 x 10^-23 J K^-1 t/s (elec.chg,energy)

Speed of light c 2.997 x 10⁸ m/s s/t (speed)

Gravitational constant G 6.67 x 10^-11 m³ kg^-1 s^-2 s⁶/t⁵ ( makes no sense)

(a) The Planck constant, is known as the 'quantum of action' which means that it is the smallest quantity of (vectorial) motion which can be applied to a mass. There is no further division of that 'action' into smaller parts, which is what the word 'quantum' implies. The space-time unit for h is t²/s, which is the unit for inertia and at magnitude 10^-34 is extremely small and at the level affecting fundamental particles. The Planck constant links Energy to Frequency, (E = hυ), in S-T units t/s = t²/s x 1/t = t/s ; Frequency to the Speed of light, (υ = c/λ) in S-T units 1/t = s/t x 1/s = 1/t ; Wavelength to Momentum, ( λ = h/p) in S-T units s = t²/s / t²/s² = t²/s x s²/t² = s. The S-T units are again entirely consistent with the SI units.

(b) The Coulomb constant is the 'quantum voltage' which applies between charges on fundamental particles such as the electron or positron. (The electron can exist without an electric charge, s, within a conductor and in that case may carry magnetic charge, s².) The charge can exist without the electron when it is a 'static' charge, perhaps attached to an atom, which does not move through the conductor. Synthetic clothing is a good example. Charge is described as a 'scalar motion' which can attach to a particle. It is the charge 'motion' which moves through a conductor as a current rather than the particle. An electron cannot 'escape' from a conductor unless it carries a charge, which enables it to move through space. The charge gives the electron the ability to move through space either within or from a conductor. The space-time unit for C is t/s² which is volts.

(c) The Boltzmann constant relates to the laws of thermodynamics, and is the 'quantum energy' relating to the motion of atoms and molecules which is manifested as heat, or temperature in degrees Kelvin. The space-time unit for k_B is t/s which is energy.

(d) The Speed of Light is the maximum limit to velocity which can be achieved by a particle possessing mass or momentum. It is the constant which relates mass to its energy equivalent. The constant c has the space-time unit s/t which is speed. For further observations on c refer below.

(e) The Gravitational constant relates the acceleration between two masses which is powered by the gravitational field. It is calculated from scientific observation and applies not as a fundamental quantity. The fundamental underlying equation is F = ma, where the 'a' equals Gm'/r². G relates the observed results to the fundamental equation. G has no space-time units which make sense.

Three of these constants define 'quantum quantities' which means the smallest possible amount ( h, C, k_B) The fourth defines the maximum limit (c). The only anomaly in Planck's five constants is G which probably does not belong there. That error arises from science's long history of misconception of the nature of gravity. It may be more appropriate to instead include the quantum of matter which, from Table 1 is 'ts' (= st) or what is presently known as the 'up-quark', if Table 1 has correctly identified the 'ts' particle. This has yet to be confirmed.

The Derivation of Frequency Constants

The above discussion of the Constants and the quantum physics equations, much of which can be credited to Max Planck's work, open further consideration of the electro-magnetic-gravity relationship and where they belong in the electromagnetic radiation spectrum. As far as is known by this author, there has not been a consideration that these fields may have a frequency. The highest known frequencies are associated with gamma radiation, which is of the order of 10²⁵ Hz. The current electro-magnetic spectrum does not look beyond gamma radiation.

The equations relevant are E_nergy = mc², E = hυ, υ = c/λ and λ = h/ρ. The Space-Time (S-T) units (Table 1) can be used to confirm the validity of the equations used to calculate the Frequency Constants. The three fields compared are the electric (E) field, the magnetic (B) field and the gravity (g) field.

E field                                            B field                                       g field

Equation E_field = 1/mc²                B_field = 1/mc                             g_field = 1/m

                        = 1/hυ                             = c/hυ                                       = c²/hυ

S-T unit s/t = (t³/s³ x s²/t²)^-1 = s/t      s²/t² = (t³/s³ x s/t)^-1 = s²/t²       s³/t³ = (t³/s³)^-1 = s³/t³ equations check = (t²/s x 1/t)^-1 = s/t           = s/t (t²/s x 1/t)^-1 = s²/t²             = s²/t²(t²/s 1/t)^-1 = s³/t³

All correct

Sub. value for h,c E = 1/hυ = 1/1.054x10^-34υ B = c/hυ = 3x10⁸/1.054x10^-34υ g= c²/hυ = 9x10¹⁶/1.054x10^-34υ

Eυ = 9.487x10³³ = K_E             Bυ = 2.846 x10⁴² = K_B          gυ = 8.538 x 10⁵⁰ = K_g

The constants allow the calculation of the frequency and wavelength of, for example the gravitational fields of the Earth and the Sun, which vary with the gravitational field strength.

Freq'cy υ_{g earth} = K_g /g_earth = 8.538x10⁵⁰/ 9.8 = 8.712x10⁴⁹Hz and Wavelength λ_{g earth} = 3.443x10^-42 m.

υ_{g sun} = K_g /g_sun = 8.538x10⁵⁰/ 274 = 3.116x10⁴⁸Hz and wavelength λ_{g sun} = 9.646x10^-41 m.

The mathematics indicate that the smaller the acceleration of matter through the gravity field, the higher the frequency of the gravity field, and therefore the higher the energy of the gravity field. This counter-intuitive result supports the validity of the equation mg = 1. It is a high mass charge which increases matter acceleration, not a high gravity field value. The constant K_g underlies a (variable) gravitation frequency many orders of magnitude higher than gamma radiation. This may help explain the large reach of the gravity field compared to the other fields, given also that the gravity field is scalar motion (speed, s/t) in three degrees of freedom, the x, y and z axes. These do not denote a position in space, but denote an orientation relationship between the axes relative to each other.

The Fundamental Particles

(7) The fundamental particles are apparently linked with the mathematics of space-time. The table below is a more detailed version of an extraction of the areas coloured in blue in Table 1 above. The S-T units align well with the Standard Model of particle physics.

Table 2

MATTER

Gen 1 electric quantity (s)	Gen 2 magnetic quantity (s2)	Gen 3 mass quantity (s3)	Gen4 force carriers (s4)
t s up quark (u)x3 strong	t s2 charm quark (c)x3 nuclear	t s3 top quark (t)x3 force	t s4 gluon (g) red x 4	Type 1 (t)
t 2 s down quark (d)x3 strong	t 2s2 strange quark (s)x3 nuclear	t 2s3 bottom quark (b)x3 force	t 2s4 photon (γ) mag.chrg momentum	Type 2 (t2)
t 3s electron (e) elect.chrg	t 3s2 muon (μ) mag.chrg	t 3s3 tau (τ) mass.chrg	t 3s4 Z-boson (Z) weak n.f.	Type 3 (t3)
t 4s electron nutrino (υe)	t 4s2 muon nutrino (υμ)	t 4s3 tau nutrino (υτ)	t 4s4 W-boson (W + -) weak n.f.	Type 4 (t4)

                                                                                Higgs Boson H ?

1/ ts anti up qk (1/u)x3	1/ ts2 anti char qk (1/c)x3	1/ ts3 anti top qk (1/t)x3	1/ ts4 gluon (g) green x 4
1/ t2s anti dn qk (1/d)x3	1/ t2s2 anti str qk (1/s)x3	1/ t2s3 anti btm qk (1/b)x3	1/ t2s4 photon ( 1/γ = γ)
1/ t3s positron (1/e)	1/ t3s2 anti muon (1/μ)	1/ t3s3 anti tau (1/τ)	1/ t3s4 Z boson (1/Z =Z)
1/ t4s anti el.nutr (1/υe)	1/ t4s2 anti mu.nutr (1/υμ)	1/ t4s3 anti tau nutr (1/υτ)	1/ t4s4 anti W bos. ( W - +)

                                                                                                                 ANTI-MATTER

The multiples of particle numbers are not clear in Table 2 as a result of the difficulty in representing the 'three colour charges' in the quarks connected with the strong nuclear force. There are 36 quarks (blue), 12 leptons (green), 8 gluons (red), 2 W bosons (red), 1 Z boson (red), 1 photon and 1 Higgs boson, total 61 sub-atomic particles in the Standard Model. The point made apparent from Table 2 is the correlation in the vertical columns of the Matter section labelled Gen 1,2,3 corresponding to the Generation classification in the Standard Model, which highlight the similarity with the scalar motions which differentiate electric, magnetic and mass energies, while Gen 4 could be seen as having an equivalence with the t⁴/s⁴ , an additional degree of freedom and energy above mass, as proposed in section (10) on life, mass carrying additional energy.

An idea worth further thought is that the wave form of the fundamental particles are sourced in time-space, the mathematical reciprocal of space-time, wherby motion is through time rather than through space. Such a possibility would help explain the quantum physics puzzles, where a particle has multiple statistical spatial possibilities rather than a sharply focussed place in a spacial location, making it difficult to observe and measure in space-time, from where we make our observations. The wave domain may belong in time-space and the particle domain in space-time. There is nothing apparent in the mathematics of Table 1 which determines that interpretation as not possible. The challenge that this possibility presents to mathematics is that st ≠ ts . If 's' is known, then 't' is not and if 't' is known then 's' is not.

Anti-matter

(8) From the mathematical considerations in Table 1, it is not immediately clear as to how to move from the mathematics of ratio (t/s and s/t), to the mathematics of product (ts [=st]) or vice versa. The product and ratio quantities are clearly linked, from observation of the physics of every-day life. For example, photons emanating from the sun will heat up the matter on Earth which is exposed to them. The mathematical link is therefore essential to support what is observed to be correct with the theory which underlies it. That link occurs through the region of anti-matter. From Table 1, if power (1/s) is multiplied by frequency (1/t) the result is 1/ts. That quantity (1/ts) is the anti-particle of the up-quark (ts). It appears that the reciprocal values of space and time together combine to form anti-matter. Anti-matter then forms the link between the space-time ratios and space-time products which make up the universe. Anti-matter multiplied by equivalent matter equals 1, which unity is mathematically similar to the relationship between the two ratios t/s and s/t. Anti-matter completes the mathematical congruity of this model of the universe.

The Speed of Light (c)

(9) Light speed, c, is a both a scalar speed of one degree of freedom (s/t) and a vectorial velocity of one degree of freedom. (Note that these 'degrees of freedom' represent scalar motions, not vectorial motions. Vectorial motions have only one degree of freedom). Current scientific notation does not normally distinguish between scalar and vectorial quantities, so that there may be misconception surrounding the differences, leading to errors and false assumptions. Examples are the misunderstanding of the difference between gravity and acceleration, and the misunderstanding of the difference between mass and matter. Both have led to further problems with comprehension in physics.

In the case of c, the scalar quality is most likely to be the version which is the link between energy and mass, as the constant in the famous E = mc². The vectorial quality of c can be seen to be affected by a change in the gravitational field strength, which makes it behave more as a speeding particle would be expected to behave. The velocity of the vectorial quality varies with the medium through which it travels, while the scalar degree of freedom probably has no relation to that, although they have the same S-T unit. Those two qualities of light may require further scrutiny, as does the convention on scientific notation, which fails to distinguish between the co-ordinate axes representing scalar motion and the co-ordinate axes representing a position in space.

It is possible that the light particle, believed to be the photon, appears to have momentum but no mass, as evidenced by the function of a 'space sail' achieving motion from light. This suggests that the photon carries a 2 freedom energy, that of momentum, which is in S-T units dimensionally the same as magnetic charge, t²/s². The implication is that the photon is the particle which carries magnetic charge, which hypothesis is supported by the phenomenum of the photo-electric effect. It is apparently a case of magnetic space (s²), passing through mass t³/s³, leaving the residual electric energy (t/s) as the result of space (s²) opposing two of mass's three degrees of freedom.

Life

(10) It seems appropriate, (if controversial,) to include the possibility that life is also a legitimate and ubiquitous part of the universe and has a place in the considerations of the 'Theory of Everything', the multitude of 'beliefs' notwithstanding. The tentative placement of life at the t/s ratio position of t⁴/s⁴ implies an additional scalar motion, that of energy (t/s) applied to mass, that is life = mass x energy, ( t⁴/s⁴ = t³/s³ . t/s). These mathematics imply that life has an additional degree of freedom (4) when compared with mass (3), and also that life's inherent energy equivalent is mc³ if Einstein's logic is carried past mass.

The other part of life, that of the intangible working of mind or 'consciousness', has its theoretical position in the s/t ratio area, again with an additional degree of freedom above that of gravity, at s⁴/t⁴ which is also reciprocal to the physical part of life, t⁴/s⁴ as discussed above. The implication of the mathematics is that life x consciousness = unity, which makes the organism whole, still an analogue of t/s and s/t as discussed above for the lower power indices. Similarly, the mathematical implication is that the 'consciousness field' is weaker per unit volume than the other fields but if consistent with the other fields, ranges across a larger volume than do the others. This view is not without parallel in the disciplines of philosophy and psychology, therein sometimes described as 'the spark of life' and 'the meeting of minds'. Another implication of the mathematics is that all life is connected with all other life, just as all mass is connected with all other mass via its reciprocal field, in the case of mass by the gravity field and in the case of life by the consciousness field. There is ample evidence every day to support the connection between life of different species, and between the same species on Earth. No-one likes to see their kitty run over, or their child either.

The proposed mathematical congruity between life and the rest of the physics of the universe imply that life is a part of the universe rather than an exception to it, suggesting that it should be expected at some point to encounter life from other places. That may change the perspective that homo sapiens has of its own species and those other species which share the planet Earth. Communication via the 'consciousness field' may be a possibilty both intra and ex planet.

Another interesting question is why matter loses its fourth energy freedom after a defined passage of time and results in 'death', or a return of the physical state of life back to the state of mass. That there is a difference between mass and life can hardly be denied. The fourth degree of freedom may differ in its behaviour from the other space-time ratios, including the possibility that, perhaps like quantum waves, it may be sourced from time-space. The fourth energy freedom may not move through 'observable' space-time and may equate to the wave form moving through time-space.

Experimental Action and Supporting Evidence

Hypothesis Based on the foregoing theory, henceforth identified as 'Theoria Omnia' (TO), it may be experimentally possible to find physical evidence of the relationship between the electric, magnetic and mass charges which are a part of the mathematical evidence supporting TO.

Aim To experimentally prove the existence of mass as a charge attached to most matter, analogous to electric charge thought to be attached to electrons, positrons and other particles.

Known Related Science Already established is the relationship between the fields of scalar motion, electricity and magnetism demonstrated by the function of the electric generator and electric motor, where one of the degrees of freedom of mass ( t³/s³ ) is opposed by space, (s), (which is also the unit of electric quantity,) moving through mass or mass moving through space, both ideas being mathematically identical. Electrical energy, (or t/s), pushing electric quantity (s) through its conductor, generating magnetic charge (t²/s²) around the conductor, or the conductor pushing through magnetic energy ( t²/s²), generating electric energy, (t/s), within the conductor. The case is motion of space through mass (or mass through space) ┴ magnetic charge ┴ electric charge.

On careful analysis, there is not an equivalent scenario in the case of mass charge (t³/s³) without moving to the higher degrees of freedom numbers, which may not occur within the 4^th dimension as far as is known, or within our realm of comprehension. One cannot push mass charge through itself, so that comprehension within the parameters of three space freedoms is not likely.

Hypothetical Experimental Design

One method of proving the existence of mass as a charge, may be to induce an observable variation in its current field, the gravitational field, which can be measured using the effect of the gravitational field on Earth, which is the measure of an object's weight. How to establish a suitable experiment is another question, requiring more consideration. The following Appendices add mathematical evidence supporting Theoria Omnia.

Table 3

Notes on Table 3

The intersection of the dashed lines and the squares represent the (space-time) points of the various known quantities. Their S-T units can be read from the axes. The information is compatible with Table 1, but in a format which makes more sense of the axes layout of Table 1 from the viewpoint of an expanding universe, but is more difficult to read. The concentric squares exhibit the relationship between electrical (inner square), magnetic and mass relationships of the Energy and Fields sectors, and their relevance to the Quarks and Leptons in the Matter and Anti-matter sectors. The Gluons (pink) and Neutrinos (v, 1/v) are outside the Mass square and generally accord with the findings of the Standard Model of particle physics regarding fundamental particles independent of mass charge. The origin of the axes is not zero, but unity, which accords with the theory of the singularity (1) from which the expansion of the universe commenced. It is clear that less is known about the Field and Energy sectors than is known about the Matter and Anti-matter sectors, as indicated by the queries (?) on Table 3. The correlation in Table 3 between previously unrelated phenomena provide a basis for new research endeavours. For example, the quantities Q_mag and f_mag have the S-T units s² and t^-2 respectively and when multiplied equal magnetic current (field) s²/t² . Frequency has not, to date, been seen as related to magnetic fields. This may involve, therefore, the magnetic energy carrier the photon, t²s⁴ and t^-2s^-4 (photon = anti-photon). It may be that t²s⁴ is the space-time particle and t^-2s^-4 is the time-space wave form of the photon, which location and velocity cannot be simultaneously measured (Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle). Frequency in the electric realm was well researched and understood by Nikola Tesla, but the parallel research in the magnetic realm has not been done because of a deficit in understanding of the relationship between the two phenomena. Table 3 assists in clarifying that relationship.

It can be seen from the S-T units that electro-magnetic radiation, or light, can also be seen in more than the one freedom. As s/t is a measure of electric field and also of light speed, so s²/t² connects the magnetic field with light speed in two freedoms. Similarly gravity with light in 3 freedoms. Gravity is an electro-magneto-mass phenomenum. Table 3 shows light on a z-axis, with time and space on the x and y axes respectively. It is as yet not clear as to whether this is correct, however it does distinguish between two dimensionally equal phenomena such as electric field and light, which appear to be physically different, as separated by orthogonality and perhaps frequency.

Appendix 1

Supporting Evidence

The Dimensions of Motion

From a paper written by Dewey B. Larson circa 1985, quote:

“Now that the existence of scalar motion has been demonstrated (in a prior article written by Larson), it will be appropriate to examine the consequences of this existence. Some of the most significant consequences are related to the dimensions of this hitherto unrecognized type of motion. The word “dimension” is used in several different senses, but in the sense in which it is applied to space it signifies the number of independent magnitudes that are required for a complete definition of a spatial quantity. It is generally conceded that space is three-dimensional. Thus three independent magnitudes are required for a complete definition of a quantity of space. Throughout the early years of science this was taken as an indication that the universe is three-dimensional. Currently, the favored hypothesis is that of a four-dimensional universe, in which the three dimensions of space are joined to one dimension of time. Strangely enough, there does not appear to have been any critical examination of the question as to the number of dimensions of motion that are possible. The scientific community has simply taken it for granted that the limits applicable to motion coincide with those of the spatial reference system. On reviewing this situation it can be seen that this assumption is incorrect. The relation of any one of the three space magnitudes to a quantity of time constitutes a scalar motion. Thus three dimensions of scalar motion are possible.

But only one dimension of motion can be accommodated within the conventional spatial reference system. The result of any motion within this reference system can be represented by a vector (a one-dimensional expression), and the resultant of any number of such motions can be represented by the vector sum (likewise one-dimensional). Any motions that exist in the other two dimensions cannot be represented. [This Author uses the term 'degree of freedom' to distinguish scalar motion from the other meanings of 'dimension']

Here again we encounter a shortcoming of the reference system. In our examination of the nature of

scalar motion we saw that this type of motion cannot be represented in the reference system in its true character. The magnitude and direction attributed to such a motion in the context of the reference system are not specifically defined, but are wholly dependent on the size and position of the object whose location constitutes the reference point. Now we find that there are motions which cannot be represented in the reference system in any manner. It is therefore evident that the system of spatial coordinates that we use in conjunction with a clock as a system of reference for physical activity gives us a severely limited, and in some respects inaccurate, view of physical reality. In order to get the true picture we need to examine the whole range of physical activity, not merely that portion of the whole that the reference system is capable of representing.

For instance, gravitation has been identified as a scalar motion, and there is no evidence that it is

subject to any kind of a dimensional limitation other than that applying to scalar motion, in general. We must therefore conclude that gravitation can act three-dimensionally. Furthermore, it can be seen that gravitation must act in all of the dimensions in which it can act. This is a necessary consequence of the relation between gravitation and mass. The magnitude of the gravitational force exerted by a material particle or aggregate (a measure of its gravitational motion) is determined by its mass. Thus mass is a measure of the inherent negative scalar motion content of the matter. It follows that motion of any mass m is a motion of a negative scalar motion. To produce such a compound motion, a positive scalar motion v (measured as speed or velocity) must be applied to the mass. The resultant is “mv,” now called momentum, but known earlier as “quantity of motion,” a term that more clearly expresses the nature of the quantity. In the context of a spatial reference system, the applied motion v has a direction, and is thus a vector quantity, but the direction is imparted by the coupling to the reference system and is not an inherent property of the motion itself. This motion therefore retains its positive scalar status irrespective of the vectorial direction.

In the compound motion mv, the negative gravitational motion acts as a resistance to the positive

motion v. The gravitational motion must therefore take place in all three of the available dimensions, as any one of the three may be parallel to the dimension of the reference system, and there would be no effective resistance in any vacant dimension. We may therefore identify the gravitational motion as three-dimensional speed, which we can express as s³/t³, where s and t are space and time respectively.

The mass (the resistance that this negative gravitational motion offers to the applied positive motion) is then the inverse of this quantity, or t³/s³. Since only one dimension of motion can be represented in three-dimensional spatial coordinate system, the gravitational motion in the other two dimensions has no directional effect, but its magnitude applies as a modifier of the magnitude of the motion in the dimension of the reference system.

We now turn to a different kind of “dimension.” When physical quantities are resolved into component quantities of a fundamental nature, these component quantities are called dimensions. The currently accepted systems of measurement express the dimensions of mechanical quantities in terms of mass, length, and time, together with the dimensions (in the first sense) of these quantities. But now that mass has been identified as a motion, a relation between space and time, all of the quantities of the mechanical system can be expressed in terms of space and time only. For purposes of the present discussion the word “space” will be used instead of “length,” to avoid implying that there is a some dimensional difference between space and time. On this basis the “dimensions,” or “space-time dimensions” of one-dimensional speed are space divided by time,

or s/t. As indicated above, mass has the dimensions t³/s³.

The product of mass and speed (or velocity) is t³/s³ × s/t = t²/s². This is “quantity of motion,” or

momentum. The product of mass and the second power of speed is t³/s³× s²/t² = t/s, which is energy. Acceleration, the time rate of change of speed, is s/t × 1/t = s/t². Multiplying acceleration by mass, we obtain t³/s³ × s/t² = t/s², which is force, the “quantity of acceleration,” we might call it. The dimensions of the other mechanical quantities are simply combinations of these basic dimensions. Pressure, for instance, is force divided by area, t/s² × 1/s² = t/s⁴.

When reduced to space-time terms in accordance with the foregoing identifications, all of the well-

established mechanical relations are dimensionally consistent. To illustrate this agreement, we may

consider the relations applicable to angular motion, which take a different form from those applying to translational motion, and utilize some different physical quantities. The angular system introduces a purely numerical quantity, the angle of rotation ς. The time rate of change of this angle is the angular velocity ω, which has the dimensions ω = ς/t = 1/t. Force is applied in the form of torque, L, which is the product of force and the radius, r. L = Fr = t/s² × s = t/s. One other quantity entering into the angular relations is the moment of inertia, symbol I, the product of the mass and the second power of the radius. I = mr² = t³/s³ × s² = t³/s. The following equations demonstrate the dimensional consistency achieved by this identification of the space-time dimensions:

energy (t/s) = L

ς = t/s × 1 = t/s

energy (t/s) = ½Iω² = t³/s × 1/t²= t/s

power (1/s) = Lω = t/s × 1/t = 1/s

torque (t/s) = ½Iω² = t³/s × 1/t²= t/s

The only dimensional discrepancy in the basic equations of the mechanical system is in the

gravitational force equation, which is expressed as F = Gmm’/d² , where G is the gravitational constant and d is the distance between the interacting masses. Although this equation is correct mathematically, it cannot qualify as a theoretically established relation. As one physics textbook puts it, this equation “is not a defining equation... and cannot be derived from defining equations. It represents an observed relationship.” The reason for this inability to arrive at a theoretical explanation of the equation becomes apparent when we examine it from a dimensional standpoint. The dimensions of force in general are those of the product of mass and acceleration. It follows that these must also be the dimensions of any specific force. For instance, the gravitational force acting on an object in the earth’s gravitational field is the product of the mass and the “acceleration due to gravity.” These same dimensions must likewise apply to the gravitational force in general. When we look at the gravitational equation in this light, it becomes evident that the gravitational constant represents the magnitude of the acceleration at unit values of m’ and d, and that these quantities are dimensionless ratios. The dimensionally correct expression of the gravitational equation is then

F = ma, where the numerical value of “a” is Gm’/d² .

The space-time dimensions of the quantities involved in current electricity can easily be identified in the same manner as those of the mechanical system. Most of the measurement systems currently in use add an electric quantity to the mass, length and time applicable to the mechanical system, bringing the total number of independent base quantities to four. However, the new information developed in the foregoing paragraphs enables expressing the electrical quantities of this class in terms of space and time only, in the same manner as the mechanical quantities.

Electrical energy (watt-hours) is merely one form of energy in general, and therefore has the energy dimensions, t/s. Power (watts) is energy divided by time, t/s × 1/t = 1/s. Electrical force, or voltage (volts) is equivalent to mechanical force, with the dimensions t/s² . Electric current (amperes) is power divided by voltage. I = 1/s × s²/t = s/t. Thus current is dimensionally equal to speed. Electrical quantity(coulombs) is current multiplied by time, and has the dimensions

Q = I t = s/t × t = s. Resistance (ohms) is voltage divided by current, R = t/s² × t/s = t²/s³. This is the only one of the basic quantities involved in the electric current phenomenon that has no counterpart in the mechanical system. Its significance can be appreciated when it is noted that the dimensions t²/s³ are those of mass per unit time.⁽¹⁾

The dimensions of other electrical quantities can be obtained by combination, as noted in

connection with the mechanical quantities. As can be seen from the foregoing, the quantities involved in the current electricity are dimensionally equivalent to those of the mechanical system.

We could, I fact, describe the current phenomena as the mechanical aspects of electricity. The only important difference is that mechanics is largely concerned with the motion of individual units or aggregates, while current electricity deals with continuous phenomena in which the individual units are not separately identified. The validity of the dimensional assignments in electricity, and the identity of the electrical and mechanical relations, can be verified by reducing the respective equations to the space-time basis. For example, in mechanics the expression for kinetic energy (or work) is W = ½ mv² , the dimensions of which are t³/s³ x s²/t² = t/s. The corresponding equation for the energy of the electric current is W = I²Rt. As mentioned above, the product Rt is equivalent to mass, while I, the current, has the dimensions of speed, s/t. Thus, like the kinetic energy, the electrical energy is the product of mass and the second power of speed, W = I²Rt = s²/t² x t²/s³ x t = t/s. Another expression for mechanical energy is force times distance, W = Fd = t/s² x s = t/s. Similarly, relations of current electricity are likewise dimensionally consistent, and equivalent to the corresponding mechanical relations, when reduced to t³/s³ x 1/t = t²/s³ space-time terms.

Identification of the space-time dimensions of electrostatic quantities, those involving

electric charge, is complicated by the fact that in present-day physical thought electric charge is not distinguished from electrical quantity. As we have seen, electric quantity is dimensionally equivalent to space. On the other hand, we can deduce from the points brought out in the preceding article that electric charge is a one-dimensional analog of mass, and is therefore dimensionally equivalent to energy. This can be verified by consideration of the relations involving electric field intensity, symbol E. In terms of charge, the electric field intensity is given by the expression

E = Q/s² . But the field intensity is defined as force per unit distance, and its space-time dimensions are therefore t/s² × 1/s = t/s³. Applying these dimensions to the equation E = Q/s² , we obtain

Q = Es² = t/s³ × s² = t/s.

As long as the two different quantities that are called by the same name are used separately, their

practical application is not affected, but confusion is introduced into the theoretical treatment of the

phenomena that are involved. For instance in the relations involving capacitance (symbol C),

Q = t/s in the basic equation C = Q/V = t/s × s²/t = s. The conclusion that capacitance is dimensionally equivalent to space is confirmed observationally, as the capacitance can be calculated from geometrical measurements. However, the usual form of the corresponding energy equation is W = QV, reflecting the definition of the volt as one joule per coulomb. In this equation, Q = W/V = t/s × s²/t = s. Because of the lack of distinction between the two usages of Q the quantity CV, which is equal to Q in the equation C = Q/V is freely substituted for Q in equations of the W = Q/V type, leading to results such as W =C/V², which are dimensionally incorrect.

Such findings emphasize the point that the ability to reduce all physical relations to their space-time

dimensions provides us with a powerful and effective tool for analyzing physical phenomena. Its

usefulness is clearly demonstrated when it is applied to an examination of magnetism, which has been the least understood of the major areas of physics. The currently accepted formulations of the various magnetic relations are a mixture of correct and incorrect expressions, but by using those that are most firmly based it is possible to identify the space-time dimensions of the primary magnetic quantities.

This information then enables correcting existing errors in the statements of other relations, and

establishing dimensional consistency over the full range of magnetic phenomena.

In carrying out such a program we find that magnetism is a two-dimensional analog of electricity. The effect of the added dimension is to introduce a factor t/s into the expressions of the relations applicable to the one-dimensional electric system. Thus the magnetic analog of an electric charge, t/s, is a magnetic charge, t²/s². The existence of such a charge is not recognized in present-day magnetic theory, probably because there is no independent magnetically-charged particle, but one of the methods of dealing with permanent magnets makes use of the concept of the “magnetic pole,” which is essentially the same thing. The unit pole strength in the SI system, the measurement system now most commonly applied to magnetism, is the weber, which is equivalent to a volt-second, and therefore has the dimensions t/s² × t = t²/s². The same units and dimensions apply to

magnetic flux, a quantity that is currently used in most relations that involve magnetic charge, as well as in other applications where flux is the more appropriate term.Current ideas concerning magnetic potential, or magnetic force, are in a state of confusion. Questions as to the relation between electric potential and magnetic potential, the difference, if any, between potential and force, and the meaning of the distinctions that are drawn between various magnetic quantities such as magnetic potential, magnetic vector potential, magnetic scalar potential, and magnetomotive force, have never received definitive answers. Now, however, by analyzing these quantities into their space-time dimensions we are able to provide the answers that have been lacking.

We find that force and potential have the same dimensions, and are therefore equivalent quantities. The term “potential” is generally applied to a distributed force, a force field, and the use of a special name in this context is probably justified, but is should be kept in mind that a potential is a force.

On the other hand, a magnetic potential (force) is not dimensionally equivalent to an electrical potential (force), as it is subject to the additional t/s factor that relates the two-dimensional magnetic quantities to the one-dimensional electric quantities. From the dimensions t/s² of the electric potential, if follows that the correct dimensions of the magnetic potential are t/s × t/s² = t²/s³ . This agrees with the dimensions of magnetic vector potential. In the SI system, the unit of this quantity is the weber per meter, or t²/s² × 1/s = t²/s³ . (The corresponding cgs unit is the gilbert, which also reduces to t²/s³ ).

The same dimensions should apply to magneto motive force (MMF), and to magnetic potential

where this quantity is distinguished from vector potential. But an error has been introduced into the

dimensions attributed to these quantities because the accepted defining relation is an empirical

expression that is dimensionally incomplete. Experiments show that the magnetomotive force can be calculated by means of the expression MMF = nI, where n is the number of turns in a coil. Since n is dimensionless, this equation indicates that MMF has the dimensions of electric current. The unit has therefore been taken as the ampere, dimensions s/t. From the discrepancy between these and the correct dimensions we can deduce that the equation MMF = nI, from which the ampere unit is derived, is lacking a quantity with the dimensions t²/s³ × t/s = t³/s⁴ .

There is enough information available to make it evident that the missing factor with these dimensions is the permeability, the magnetic analog of electrical resistance. The permeability of most substances is unity, and omitting has no effect on the numerical results of most experimental measurements. This has led to overlooking it in such relations as the one used in deriving the ampere unit for MMF. When we put the permeability (symbol μ) into the empirical equation it becomes MMF = μnI, with the correct dimensions, t³/s⁴ × s/t = t²/s³.

The error in the dimensions attributed to MMF carries over into the potential gradient, the

magnetic field intensity. By definition, this is the magnetic field potential divided by distance,

t²/s³ × 1/s = t²/s⁴ .

But the unit in the SI system is the ampere per meter, the dimensions of which are s/t × 1/s = 1/t is incorrect. In this case, the cgs unit, the oersted, is derived from the dimensionally correct unit of magnetic potential, and therefore has the correct dimensions, t²/s⁴ .

The discrepancies in the dimensions of MMF and magnetic field intensity are typical of the confusion that exists in a number of magnetic areas. Much progress has been made toward

clarifying these situations in the past few decades, both active, and sometimes acrimonious, controversies still persist with respect to such quantities as magnetic moment and the two vectors usually designated by the letters B and H. In most of these cases, including those specifically mentioned, introduction of the permeability where it is appropriate, or removing it where it is inappropriate, is all that is necessary to clear up the confusion and attain dimensional validity.

Correction of the errors in electric and magnetic theory that have been discussed in the foregoing

paragraphs, together with clarification of physical relations in other areas of confusion, enables

expressing all electric and magnetic quantities and relations in terms of space and time, thus completing the consolidation of all of the various systems of measurement into one comprehensive and consistent system. An achievement of this kind is, of course, self-verifying, as the possibility that there might be more than one consistent system of dimensional assignments that agree with observations over the entire field of physical activity is negligible.

But straightening out the system of measurement is only a small part of what has been accomplished in this development. More importantly, the positive identification of the space-time dimensions of any physical quantity defines the basic physical nature of that quantity. Consequently, any hypothesis with respect to a physical process in which this quantity participates must agree with the dimensional definition. The effect of this constraint on theory construction is illustrated by the findings with respect to the nature of current electricity that were mentioned earlier. Present-day theory views the electric current as a flow of electric charges. But the dimensional analysis shows that charge has the dimensions t/s, whereas the moving entity in the current flow has the dimensions of space, s. It follows that the current is not a flow of electric charges. Furthermore, the identification of the space-time dimensions of the moving entity not only tells us what the current is not, but goes on to reveal just what it is. According to present-day theory, the carriers of the charges, which are identified as electrons, move through the spaces between the atoms. The finding that the moving entities have the dimensions of space makes this kind of a flow pattern impossible. An entity with the dimensions of space cannot move through space, as the relation of space to space is not motion. Such an entity must move through the matter itself, not through the vacant spaces. This explains why the current is confined within the conductor, even if the conductor is bare. If the carriers of the current were able to move forward through vacant spaces between atoms, they should likewise be able to move laterally through similar spaces, and escape from the conductor. But since the current moves through the matter, the confinement is a necessary consequence. The electric current is a movement of space through matter, a motion that is equivalent, in all but direction, to movement of matter through space. This is a concept that many individuals will find hard to accept. But it should be realized that the moving entities are not quantities of the space with which we are familiar, extension space, we may call it. There are physical quantities that are dimensionally equivalent to this space of our ordinary experience, and play the same role in physical activity. One of them, capacitance, has already been mentioned in the preceding discussion. The moving entities are quantities of this kind, not quantities of extension space.

Here, then, is the explanation of the fact that the basic quantities and relations of the electric current

phenomena are identical with those of the mechanical system. The movement of space through matter is essentially equivalent to the movement of matter through space, and is described by the same mathematical expressions. Additionally, the identification of the electric charge as a motion explains the association between charges and certain current phenomena that has been accepted as evidence in favor of the “moving charge” theory of the electric current. One observation that has had considerable influence on scientific thought is that an electron moving in open space has the same magnetic properties as an electric current. But we can now see that the observed electron is not merely a charge. It is a particle with an added motion that constitutes the charge. The carrier of the electric current is the same particle without the charge. A charge that is stationary in the reference system has electrostatic properties. An uncharged electron

in motion within a conductor has magnetic properties. A charged electron moving in a conductor or in a gravitational field has both magnetic and electrostatic properties.

It is the motion of physical entities with the dimensions of space that produces the magnetic effect.

Whether or not these entities—electrons or their equivalent—are charged is irrelevant from this

standpoint. Another observed phenomenon that has contributed to the acceptance of the “moving charge” theory is the emission of charged electrons from current-carrying conductors under certain conditions. The argument in this instance is that if charged electrons come out of

a conductor there must have been charged electrons in the conductor. The answer to this is that the kind of motion which constitutes the charge is easily imparted to a particle or atom (as anyone who handles one of the modern synthetic fabrics can testify), and this motion is imparted to the electrons in the process of ejection from the conductor. Since the uncharged particle cannot move through space, the acquisition of a charge is one of the requirements for escape.

In addition to providing these alternative explanations for aspects of the electric current phenomena

that are consistent with the “moving charge” theory, the new theory of the current that emerges from

the scalar motion study also accounts for a number of features of the current flow that are difficult to reconcile with the conventional theory. But the validity of the new theory does not rest on a summation of its accomplishments. The conclusive point is that the identification of the electric current as a motion of space through matter is confirmed by agreement with the dimensions of the participating entities, dimensions that are verified by every physical relation in which the electric current is involved. The proof of validity can be carried even farther. It is possible to put the whole development of thought in this and the preceding article to a conclusive test. We have found that mass is a three-dimensional scalar motion, and that electric current is a one-dimensional scalar motion through a mass by entities that have the dimensions of space. We have further found that magnetism is a two-dimensional analog of electricity. If these findings are valid, certain consequences necessarily follow that are extremely difficult, perhaps impossible, to explain in any other way. The one-dimensional, oppositely directed flow of the current through the three-dimensional scalar motion of matter neutralizes a portion of the motion in one of the three dimensions, and should leave an observable two-dimensional (magnetic) residue. Similarly, movement of a two-dimensional (magnetic) entity through a mass, or the equivalent

of such a motion, should leave a one-dimensional (electric) residue. In as much as these are direct and specific requirements of the theory outlined in the foregoing paragraphs, and are not called for by any other physical theory, their presence or absence is a definitive test of the validity of the theory. The observations give us an unequivocal answer. The current flow produces a magnetic effect, and this effect is perpendicular to the direction of the current, just as it must be if it is the residue of a three-dimensional motion that remains after motion in the one dimension of the current flow is neutralized.

This perpendicular direction of the magnetic effect of the current is a total mystery to present-day

physical science, which has no explanation for either the origin of the effect or its direction. But both the origin and the direction are obvious and necessary consequences of our findings with respect to the nature of mass and the electric current. There is no independent magnetic particle similar to the carrier of the electric current, and no two-dimensional motion of space through matter analogous to the one-dimensional motion of the current is possible, but the same effect can be produced by mechanical movement of mass through a magnetic field, or an equivalent process. As the theory requires, the one-dimensional residue of such motion is observed to be an electric current. This process is electromagnetic induction. The magnetic effect of the current is

electromagnetism.

On first consideration it might seem that the magnitude of the electromagnetic effect is far out of

proportion to the amount of gravitational motion that is neutralized by the current. However, this is a result of the large numerical constant, 3 × 10¹⁰ in cgs units (represented by the symbol c), that applies to the space-time ratio s/t where conversion from an n-dimensional quantity to an m-

dimensional quantity takes place. An example that, by this time is familiar to all, E=mc², is the conversion of mass (t³/s³) to energy (t/s). In that process, where the relation is between a three-dimensional quantity and a one-dimensional quantity, the numerical factor is c². In the relation between the three-dimensional mass andthe two-dimensional magnetic residue the numerical factor is c, less than c² but still a very large number.

Thus, the theory of the electric current developed in the foregoing discussion passes the test of validity in a definite and positive manner. The results that it requires are in full agreement with two observed physical phenomena of a significant nature that are wholly unexplained in present-day physical thought. Together with the positively established validity of the corresponding system of space-time dimensions, this test provides a verification of the entire theoretical development described in this article, a proof that meets the most rigid scientific standard.

Author's Comment on the above Evidence for S-T units by D.B.Larson.

Larson's presentation of the evidence for the accuracy of the equivalence and proscriptive power of S-T units in physics cannot be seriously doubted. The mathematics leave little scope for doubt. The leap forward from Larson's work by Theoria Omnia (TO) theory is the realization that mass is a charge and its current field, gravity, are the exact higher dimensional analogue of electric charge and the electric current, and magnetic charge and the magnetic current. All three fields caused by their currents behave in a similar manner, as their strength per unit volume decreases (as indicated by the s/t mathematics previously discussed under Time (5) above) the volume throughout which they have an effect increases. Similarly, their charges are all analogues of space (s, s², s³). Additionally, the forces they generate all decrease as 1/r².

Appendix 2

Supporting Evidence

Space-Time Units and known SI unit equivalence

(From a previous paper written by M.J.Bull)

MECHANICAL                                                                                             Space-Time Units

Speed (distance [1 freedom of space] divided by time) [speed is not vectorial]                  s / t

Momentum ( mass x speed, t³/s³ x s/t = t²/s² ) a 2 freedom quantity                              t² / s²

Energy ( ½ mv², mass x speed x speed, t³/s³ x s/t x s/t = t/s )                                        t / s

Acceleration ( speed divided by time, s/t x 1/t = s/t² )                                                    s / t²

Force ( mass x acceleration, t³/s³ x s/t² = t/s² )                                                               t / s²

Pressure ( force divided by area, t/s² x 1/s² = t/s⁴ )                                                         t / s⁴

ELECTRICAL [Electrical energy equates to Mechanical energy, a one freedom (s) energy.]

Electrical energy (watt.hours)                                                                                          t / s

Electrical charge (a one freedom unit of space ≡ distance)                                                    s

Power (watt) ( energy / time, t/s x 1/t = 1/s) [a unit of space and not time]                       1 / s

Voltage (volt) ( electrical force ) [ equivalent to force] emf                                                t / s²

Electric field (amp) ( electric current ) [equivalent to speed]                                              s / t

Resistance (ohm) (voltage/current t/s² x t/s = t²/s³)[no mechnical equivalent]                     t² / s³

MAGNETIC [Magnetism is a two freedom (s²) analogue of Electricity]

Magnetic energy [t/s x t/s]                                                                                                t² / s²

Magnetic charge (a two freedom unit of space ≡ area)                                                            s²

Magnetic Potential (magnetic potential = force x 1 freedom t/s² x t/s = t²/s³) mmf            t² / s³

Magnetic Field Intensity (t²/s³ x 1/s)                                                                                t² / s⁴

Magnetic Permeability (μ)                                                                                                t³ / s⁴

Magnetic field (current) (s²/t²)                                                                                          s² / t²

MASS [Mass is a three freedom (s³) analogue of Electricity]

Mass energy [t/s x t/s x t/s]                                                                                              t³ / s³

Mass charge ( a three freedom unit of space ≡ volume)                                                          s³

Gravitational field (mass field, mass current) (a 3 freedom speed, s/t x s/t x s/t)                  s³ / t³

Newtonian Equations expressed using Acceleration units as N/kg instead of m/s²

An alternative unit of measure for acceleration also offers another set of Newtonian equations. They represent an alternative approach to calculating quantities seen in Newtonian physics.

For example, given the alternative measures for acceleration N kg ^-1 = ms^-2, then s^-2 = N kg^-1 m^-1, therefore s² = kg m N ^-1 and s = √ (kg.m / N) which in English says that time equals the square root of (mass times length divided by force).

Symbols used are F = force, m = mass, a = acceleration, ί (iota) = inertia, t = time, v = velocity, r = length, M = momentum, n = dimension number, c = the speed of light, g = gravity field, E = mass-energy and k denotes a constant. Symbols in SI units are force (N) newtons, mass (kg) kilograms, time (s) seconds, length (m) metres. Symbols in S-T units are s = space, t = time.

Quantity                             Equation                       SI Unit                           Space-Time Unit

                                                                                                          (derived from these equations)

Time                              t = √ ( m r / F )              ( kg m / N )^½                               t

Acceleration                  a = F / m                        ( N / kg)                                     s/t²

Velocity                         v = Ft /m                        ( N s / kg)                                   s/t

Length                           r = Ft ² / m                     ( N s² / kg)                                  s

Mass                           m = F t ² / r                   ( N s² / m )                            t³/s³

Force                          F = m r / t ²                      ( kg m / s² )                               t/s²

Momentum                 M = F ² t ³ / m r                ( N² s³ / kg m )                        t²/s²

Space-Time Units show complete consistency in these modified Newtonian Equations, indicating that both the modified Newtonian Equations and the Space-Time Units are correct and consistent, as predicted.

 It also verifies that the space-time unit for mass, t³/s³ is correct. This is key evidence supporting the interpretation of Mass and Gravity by Theoria Omnia.

Summation of Effects of the Theoria Omnia Model and of Human Nature

The most immediate effect of this paper is to correct the misconception of the place and nature of the Gravity field within physics, an unresolved problem for more than three centuries. The distinguishing of the difference between Gravity and Acceleration, and Mass and Matter allows a clearer interpretation of some of the apparently inexplicable riddles which theoretical physics has faced in a number of areas of endeavour, particularly in the interpretation of the cosmos. The proposition that Mass is a charge and not solid matter is perhaps the most difficult concept for mainstream science to accept, but it does provide the missing paradigm in the 350 year search for an explanation of Gravity. The complexity which has attended the conceptual misunderstanding is immense, and has lead science down many dead ends. The acceptance of this new paradigm opens the way for targeted theoretical and practical advances in science. If the answer (after 350 years) is not within the square, it perhaps may make sense to look outside the square. Human nature is a large inertia when applied to new thought, as Einstein learned a century ago. Einstein himself proved to be an inertia for Quantum Physics.

In the longer term, the more valuable contribution to physics and other disciplines of science that this paper makes is the illumination of that which is not known, and its relationship to what is known.

It allows the re-direction of available resources toward the areas of knowledge deficit, with some concept of the benefits which may follow from enlightenment in those areas, and of the direction needed for research to solve specific problems to achieve specific aims.

As a philosophical observation, the division of knowledge into narrow specialities along with the separation of thought from action may be a modern indicator of a decline in scientific and intellectual effectiveness when compared with recent and previous centuries of scientific endeavour. The human nature factors which inhibit scientific progress are probably no different to earlier centuries, except for the influences attributable to modern funding systems for research, and a more competitive 'win even at the expense of science' attitude reflects a departure from the precepts of scientific method. An elitist label given to new ideas as 'pseudo-science' is unhelpful and a part of the aforementioned attitude, contributing to a metaphorical constipation of scientific thought. This is evidence 'maxima' in the 350 year drought in new thought in the case of Gravity.